ArticleJournal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR2024
Conflict Adaptation in Aphasia: Upregulating Cognitive Control for Improved Sentence Comprehension.
Article in Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Lexical Search and Retrieval in Aphasia: A Computational Analysis of Semantic Fluency.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2026Article
- Developing Cognitive Control Training for Aphasia: Insights From Treatment Theory and Enablement Theory.Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis study investigated conflict adaptation in aphasia, specifically whether upregulating cognitive control improves sentence comprehension.
methodFour individuals with mild aphasia completed four eye tracking sessions with interleaved auditory Stroop and sentence-to-picture matching trials (critical and filler sentences). Auditory Stroop congruency (congruent/incongruent across a male/female voice saying "boy"/"girl") was crossed with sentence congruency (syntactically correct sentences that are semantically plausible/implausible), resulting in four experimental conditions (congruent auditory Stroop followed by incongruent sentence [CI], incongruent auditory Stroop followed by incongruent sentence [II], congruent auditory Stroop followed by congruent sentence [CC], and incongruent auditory Stroop followed by congruent sentence [IC]). Critical sentences were always preceded by auditory Stroop trials. At the end of each session, a five-item questionnaire was administered to assess overall well-being and fatigue. We conducted individual-level mixed-effects regressions on reaction times and growth curve analyses on the proportion of eye fixations to target pictures during incongruent sentences.
resultsOne participant showed conflict adaptation indicated by faster reaction times on active sentences and more rapid growth in fixations to target pictures on passive sentences in the II condition compared to the CI condition. Incongruent auditory Stroop also modulated active-sentence processing in an additional participant, as indicated by eye movements.
conclusionsThis is the first study to observe conflict adaptation in sentence comprehension in people with aphasia. The extent of adaptation varied across individuals. Eye tracking revealed subtler effects than overt behavioral measures. The results extend the study of conflict adaptation beyond neurotypical adults and suggest that upregulating cognitive control may be a potential treatment avenue for some individuals with aphasia. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.27056149.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.